Chapter 24

Innocent’s AnswertoChrysostom’s Let-ter.

Innocent, acting with his usual Prudence and Circumspection, in his Answer to the above-mentioned Letters, declared, that he admittedthe Bishops of both Parties to his Communion, from which he could exclude no Man till he was lawfully judged and condemned; and that therefore, to compose all Differences, and leave no room for Complaints on either Side, it was fit a Council should be assembled, consisting of the Western as well as the Eastern Bishops. The other Bishops ofItaly, to whomChrysostomhad written, returned much the same Answer[1414], following therein the Advice, whichChrysostomhimself had given to the Bishops of his Party;viz.that they should communicate with his Enemies, to prevent Divisions in the Church, but not sign his Condemnation, because he did not think himself guilty[1415].Innocent’s Answer toTheophiluswas in Words to the same Effect. His Letter toChrysostomwas carried into the East byDemetriusBishop ofPessinus, who took care to shew it every-where, to the end it might be every-where known, that theRomanChurch still communicated with that holy Bishop[1416].

Theophiluswrites toInnocent.

A few Days afterInnocenthad answeredChrysostom’s Letter,Petrus, one ofTheophilus’s Presbyters, andMartyriusDeacon of the Church ofConstantinople, arrived atRome, with Letters fromTheophilus, and the Acts ofChrysostom’s Deposition by the Councilad Quercum. From these it appeared, that the Council had consisted of Thirty-six Bishops, whereof Twenty-nine wereEgyptians, and over theseTheophilushad, as their Metropolitan, too great an Influence; thatChrysostomhad been condemned without being heard, and that nothing had been laid to his Charge, deserving so severe and exemplary a Punishment.|Innocent's Answer toTheophilus.|Innocenttherefore, having read them, with the utmost Indignation, answeredTheophilusin a few Words; that he was determined, as he had notified to him by his former Letter, to communicate both with him and his BrotherJohn; that he could by no means depart from the Communion of the latter, till he was lawfully judged and condemned; that a Council was to be soon held, before which it was incumbent uponTheophilusto make good his Charge, and the Steps he had hitherto taken, by the Canons and Decrees of the Council ofNice, since theRomanChurch admitted no others[1417].|Letters from theBishops ofChry-sostom’s Party toInnocent.|With this LetterPetrusandMartyriusreturned toConstantinople, whence arrived atRome, soon after their Departure from that City,Theoctecnus, a Presbyter of the Church ofConstantinople, and one ofChrysostom’s Friends, with Letters from Twenty-five Bishops,informingInnocent, thatChrysostomhad been driven a Second time from his See; that he had been conducted by a Band of Soldiers toCucusus, and confined to that Place; and that the great Church had been consumed by Fire, the very Day he was carried out ofConstantinople.Innocentwas greatly affected with this Account, and shed many Tears in reading it. But as these Troubles and Disorders were fomented by some great Men at the Court either ofArcadiusorHonorius, and a Misunderstanding was then subsisting between the Two Brothers, or their Ministers, he concluded, that his Endeavours towards the restoring of Peace and Unity would prove unsuccessful, and might even blow the Fire, which already burnt with so much Violence, into a greater Flame.|Who sends Lettersof Communion to them.|On these Considerations he wisely forbore making any Application for the present toHonorius, and only sent Letters of Communion toChrysostom, and the Bishops, who had espoused his Cause[1418].|Letters fromAcaciustoInnocent.|These Letters were delivered toTheoctecnus, who was scarce gone, when onePaternus, who styled himself a Presbyter of the Church ofConstantinople, arrived atRome, with Letters fromAcacius, who had been intruded into the See ofConstantinople, and from some other Bishops of his Party, chargingChrysostomwith setting Fire to theBasilicor Great Church. So barefaced a Calumny provokedInnocentto such a Degree, that he would neither hearPaternus, nor return an Answer to the Letters he had brought.

Chrysostom’s Friendscruelly persecuted.

In the mean time a most cruel Persecution was railed atConstantinople, againstChrysostom’s Friends, refusing to communicate withAcacius,Theophilus, andPorphyrius, who had intruded himself into the vacant See ofAntioch, and, in Defiance of the Canons, maintained, by Force of Arms, the Dignity he had usurped. This Persecution was carried on under a Christian Emperor, with as much Cruelty as any had ever been under the most inveterate Enemies of the Christian Name. The Pretence they made use of was to discover the Authors of the late Fire; and as the Imperial Officers chiefly suspected, or pretended to suspect,Chrysostom’s Friends,Optatus, who was then Prefect or Governor ofConstantinople, and a Pagan, laid hold of that Opportunity to vent upon them the implacable Hatred he bore to the Religion they professed. Many therefore, without Distinction of Sex or Condition, were, by his Orders, dragged to thepublic Gaols, and confined there to Dungeons; others tormented with such Barbarity as to expire on the Rack; and great Numbers, after having undergone repeated Tortures, stript of all their Effects, and banished to the most remote and desolate Places of the Empire.

Two Edicts enactedagainst them.

At the same time the EmperorArcadius, strangely prepossessed againstChrysostom, and those of his Communion, caused Two Edicts to be published; the one directed to the Governors of the Provinces, whom he strictly injoined not to suffer, in their respective Jurisdictions, any private Assemblies or Meetings of Persons, who, despising the Churches, worshiped elsewhere, lest they should seem to communicate with themost Reverend Prelates of the holy Law,Arsacius,Theophilus, andPorphyrius. The other commanded such Bishops as refused to communicate with them, to be driven from their Sees, and their Effects to be seized. The Persecution, which still raged, though it was soon after stopt at the Remonstrances ofStudiusthePræfectus Prætorio, and the Severity, with which the Two Imperial Edicts were put in Execution, drove great Numbers, both of the Clergy and Laity, fromConstantinople, and the Provinces subject toArcadius. Among the former wereCyriacusBishop ofSynnada,EulysiusofApameainBithynia,PalladiusofHelenopolis,Germanusa Presbyter, andCassianusa Deacon, who afterwards embraced the Monastic Life, and became famous for his Ascetic Writings.|Several Bishops, andthe whole Clergy ofConstantinople,writetoInnocent.|Eulysiusbrought Letters toInnocentfrom Fifteen Bishops ofChrysostom’s Communion, acquainting him with the deplorable State of theConstantinopolitanChurch, and one fromAnysiusofThessalonica, declaring, that in the present unhappy Divisions he had resolved to conform intirely to the Sentiments of theRomanChurch.GermanusandCassianuslikewise delivered Letters toInnocent, written in the Name of the whole Clergy ofConstantinople, and giving him an Account of the Persecution that still raged, and of the cruel Treatment their Bishop had met with[1419].|His Answer to theClergy.|Innocent, in his Answer to this Letter, expresses, in the most pathetic Terms, his Concern for the unhappy State of that Church, and their Sufferings; he encourages them to bear, with Patience, their present Tribulation and Afflictions, nay, and with Joy, since it is for the sake of Justice they suffer, and are thus persecuted; he complains of the undue Deposition of his Collegue, and Installation of another in his Life-time, which he shows to be against the Canons of the CouncilofNice, the only Canons admitted and obeyed by theRomanChurch: he concludes with informing them, that as he had always thought it necessary, that an Oecumenical Council should assemble, he had long considered, and was still considering, by what Means it might be assembled,since a Council, and nothing else, could appease so violent a Storm, and restore to the Church the so much wished for Tranquillity[1420].

Two Presbyters in the mean time came toRomefrom the East,DomitianusofConstantinople, andVallagusofNisibisinMesopotamia, and brought with them the original Acts, which they had purchased with a large Sum of the Imperial Officers, containing an authentic Detail of the Cruelties which some Women of Quality had been made to endure for not communicating withArsacius, and the Bishops of his Faction.|Innocentapplies toHonorius;|With these the good Bishop was so deeply affected, that he could no longer forbear applying toHonorius, who, at his Request, writ immediately toArcadiusa very pressing and friendly Letter in favour ofChrysostom, and those of his Communion. At the same time he issued an Order for convening a Council of the Western Bishops, who, meeting soon after atRome, drew up an Address, which they sent toRavenna, where the Emperor then was, earnestly intreating him to interpose anew his good Offices with his BrotherArcadius, that an Oecumenical Council might be allowed to assemble atThessalonica, in order to compose the present Differences, which had already produced a Misunderstanding between the Eastern and Western Churches, and might in the End bring on an intire Separation.|who writes toArcad-ius.|Honorius, in Compliance with their Request, writ a Third Letter toArcadius(for he had, it seems, written already a Second), and at the same time one toInnocent, desiring him to appoint Five Bishops, Two Presbyters of theRomanChurch, and One Deacon, to carry his Letter into the East, thinking that such a Legation would add no small Weight to his Mediation. The Letter toArcadiuswas in the following Terms:

His Letter.

“This is the Third time I write to your Meekness (ad Mansuetudinem tuam) intreating you to correct and rectify the iniquitous Proceedings that have been carried on againstJohnBishop ofConstantinople. But nothing, I find, has been hitherto done in his Behalf. Having therefore much at Heart the Peace of the Church,which will be attended with that of our Empire, I write to you anew by these holy Bishops and Presbyters, earnestly desiring you to command the Eastern Bishops to assemble atThessalonica. The Western Bishops have sent Five of their Body, Two Presbyters of theRomanChurch, and One Deacon, all Men of the strictest Equity, and quite free from the Byass of Favour and Hatred. These I beg you would receive with that Regard which is due to their Rank and Merit: If they findJohnto have been justly deposed, they may separate me from his Communion; and you from the Communion of the Orientals, if it appears that he has been unjustly deposed. The Western Bishops have very plainly expressed their Sentiments, in the many Letters they have written to me on the Subject of the present Dispute. Of these I send you Two, the one from the Bishop ofRome, the other from the Bishop ofAquileia; and with them the rest agree. One thing I must above all beg of your Meekness; that you obligeTheophilusofAlexandriato assist at the Council, how averse soever he may be to it; for he is said to be the first and chief Author of the present Calamities. Thus the Synod, meeting with no Delays or Obstructions, will restore Peace and Tranquillity in our Days[1421].”

The Pope’s Legatesnot allowed to touchatThessalonica.

With these Letters the Legates set out fromRome, attended by the above-mentioned PrelatesDemetrius,Cyriacus,Eulysius, andPalladius; and, sailing forGreece, put in atAthens, with a Design to pursue their Voyage toThessalonica, having Letters fromInnocenttoAnysiusBishop of that City. But atAthensthey were, to their great Surprize, stopt and detained by a Military Tribune, who let them know, that they must not touch atThessalonica; and at the same time appointed a Centurion as a Guard over them, strictly injoining him not to suffer them, under any Pretence whatsoever, to approach that City. Soon after the Tribune parted them, and, putting them on board Two Vessels, ordered the Mariners to convey them strait toConstantinople.Anysiuscommunicated withChrysostom, as I have observed above; and it was, without all doubt, on this Consideration that the Legates were not allowed to set foot in his Diocese.|The hard Usage theymet with on theirJourney,|They arrived atConstantinoplethe Third Day after they had leftAthens, but starved with Hunger; for the Tribune had neither supplied them with Provisions when they embarked, nor allowed them Time tosupply themselves; so that they had tasted no Kind of Victuals during the Three Days they were at Sea.|and atConstant-inople.|On their Arrival atConstantinople, they were not suffered to come ashore there, but ordered to a Castle on theThracianCoast calledAthyra, where they were all closely confined, the Legates in one common Room, and the other Bishops in so many separate Cells. As the People ofConstantinoplewere most zealously attached toChrysostom, the Emperor apprehended, and with a great deal of Reason, that their entering the City, and conversing publicly there, might be attended with uncommon Disturbances and Commotions; and therefore thought it adviseable to keep them at a Distance, and under Confinement. They had not been long thus confined, when they were ordered, they knew not by whom, to deliver the Letters they had brought. But neither by this Person, whoever he was, nor by several others, who were successively sent on the same Errand, could they be prevailed upon to part with them, alleging, that Letters from an Emperor ought to be delivered to none but an Emperor.

As they continued firm and unshaken in this Resolution, oneValerian, a Military Tribune, was at last called in, and ordered to employ the Rhetoric peculiar to his Profession, since no other could prevail.|The Letters takenfrom them by Force.|Valerianaccordingly, after a short Preamble, proceeded to Violence; and, seizing them, took the Letters by Force, having in the Struggle wounded one of the Bishops in the Hand. The next Day they were visited by a Person, who, without acquainting them who he was, or by whom sent, offered them a very considerable Sum, on condition they would communicate withAtticus, who, upon the Death ofArsacius, had, by the Bishops of his Faction, been intruded in his room.|They are put on boarda leaky Vessel;|Upon their rejecting, as they did, with the utmost Indignation, this Offer,Valerian, who was present, conducted them under a strong Guard to the Sea-side, and there put them on board an old leaky Vessel, having first, with a large Bribe, prevailed upon the Commander, as they were informed, to engage his Word, that they should not outlive that Voyage.|but arrive safe inItaly.|They outlived it however, and, having reachedLampsacus, they embarked on board another Vessel, which landed them safe atOtranto. As for the Eastern Bishops who had attended them fromRome, viz.Cyriacus,Eulysius,Palladius, andDemetrius, after having been some time kept under close Confinement atAthyra, they were banished to the most remote and abandoned Places of the Empire. The other Bishops, who refused tocommunicate withAtticus,Theophilus, andPorphyrius, fared no better, being in like manner either driven into Banishment, or obliged to abscond, and, under the Disguise of Mechanics, earn their Livelihood by the meanest Professions. Many perished in the Places of their Exile for want of Necessaries; and others were so cruelly harassed, nay, and barbarously beaten, by the merciless Soldiery, appointed to conduct them, that they died on the Road[1422]. Such were the wretched Effects of that unchristian Principle of Persecution being lawful to punish Error in religious Disputes, which all Sects of Christians then held, and all suffered by in their Turns, as the different Parties among them got the Civil Magistrate and Force on their Side.

Honoriusresolves torevenge the Affrontoffered to his Embas-sadors, but is divertedfrom it.

Honorius, being informed of the base Treatment the Legates had met with, though vested with the sacred Character of Embassadors, was so provoked at such a notorious Violation of the Right of Nations, that he resolved to make War on his Brother, and revenge it by Force of Arms. But from this Resolution he was diverted by a threatened Invasion of theBarbarians, and the seasonable Discovery of the famousStilicho’s Treachery, which obliged him to keep all his Troops inItaly, or the adjoining Provinces. As forInnocent, finding the Mediation ofHonorius, which he had procured, prove unsuccessful, and no other Means left of affording the least Relief toChrysostomand the other persecuted Bishops, he resolved to make known to the World his Abhorrence of the Evils, which it was not in his Power to redress; and accordingly separated himself from the Communion ofAtticus,Theophilus, andPorphyrius, as the chief Authors of the present Calamities[1423].

ArcadiusandEudoxianot excommunicatedbyInnocent.

Baronius, thinking it inconsistent with the Dignity of his High Pontiff thus tamely to bear with the insulting Conduct ofArcadius, would fain persuade us, that, after he had tried in vain all other Methods of bringing the Emperor, and the EmpressEudoxia, to a Sense of their Duty, he at last thought himself obliged to thunder against both the tremendous Sentence of Excommunication, cutting them off as rotten Members from the Body of the Faithful committed to his Care and Direction. To prove this, he produces several Letters fromInnocenttoArcadius, and fromArcadiustoInnocent, transcribed partly fromGennadius,Glycas, andNicephorus, and partly from theVaticanManuscripts[1424]. To enter into a critical Examination of thosePieces, would be wasting Time, and tiring the Reader to no Purpose. I shall therefore content myself with Three Observations, each of them sufficient, in my Opinion, to make the World reject them all as mere Forgeries. In the first place, the Silence of the Historians, who writ at that Time, touching so remarkable and unprecedented an Event as the Excommunication of an Emperor and an Empress, is an unanswerable Confutation of every Proof that can be alleged to support the Authenticity of the pretended Letters. For who can imagine, that the Writers, who flourished then, and have transmitted to us most minute Accounts of far less important Transactions both Civil and Ecclesiastical, would have passed this over in Silence? In the Second place,Eudoxiais supposed, in all those Letters, to have outlivedChrysostom; whereas it is certain, that she died in 404, four Years before him. Lastly, In the above-mentioned Letter,Arcadiusis all along supposed to have repented, and changed his Conduct towardsChrysostom, to have persecuted his Enemies as he had formerly done his Friends, and to have chiefly vented his Resentment on the first Author of all the Disturbances, the Empress, who thereupon, out of Grief, Rage, and Despair, fell into a dangerous Malady[1425]. But of all this not the least Hint is to be met with inPalladius, who writ in the last Days of the Life and Reign ofArcadius; nay, that Historian speaks of the Friends ofChrysostomas Men still under the Emperor’s Displeasure, and feeling the dreadful Effects of it in the inhospitable Places, to which they had been formerly confined.

Chrysostomdid notappeal to the See ofRome.

From the Conduct ofChrysostomon this Occasion, theRoman-CatholicDivines have taken a great deal of Pains to prove, that the Custom of appealing to the See ofRomeobtained in his Time; that he actually appealed to that See; and consequently, that the Prerogative of receiving Appeals from all Parts, and finally deciding all Controversies, claimed by the Bishops ofRome, was then acknowleged even in the East. Nothing surely but the utmost Distress for want of other Instances to prove their Assertion, could have tempted them to make use of this; since, from the Conduct ofChrysostomon this very Occasion, nay, and from that ofInnocenttoo, if set in their true Light, it may be undeniably made out, that this pretended Prerogative was utterly unknown to both. The Fact stand thus, and thus it is related by the Historians, who have transmitted it to us:Chrysostomis unjustly accused; the Bishop ofAlexandriatakes upon him to inquire into his Conduct; assembles a Council, consisting chiefly ofEgyptianBishops, and summonsChrysostomto appear before them:Chrysostompays no Regard to the Summons, protests against it, and will not allow the Bishops assembled to have any Power or Authority over him,since it had been ordained by the Canons of the Church, that the Affairs of the Provinces should be regulated by the Bishops of the Provinces; and it was consequently very incongruous, that the Bishops ofThraceshould be judged by those ofEgypt[1426]. No Regard is had to his Protest, none to the Canons upon which it was grounded: he is summoned anew; and, not appearing within the limited Time, is judged, condemned, and deposed. From this Sentence he appeals to a lawful Council; but, being, notwithstanding his Appeal, driven from his See, he recurs at last to the Western Bishops, namely, toInnocentofRome,VeneriusofMilan, andChromatiusofAquileia, intreating them not to abandon him in his Distress, nor exclude him from their Communion[1427], but to procure by all means the assembling of a General Council, in order to restore the Church to her former Tranquillity.

Chrysostoman utterStranger to the Powerof receiving Appealsin the Bishops ofRome.

Such was the Conduct ofChrysostom: and, from this Conduct, does it not manifestly appear, thatChrysostomwas an utter Stranger to the pretended Power in the Bishops ofRomeof receiving Appeals from all other Tribunals, and finally determining all Controversies? Who can think, that, had he been acquainted with such a Prerogative, he would, when so unjustly oppressed, have appealed to a Council, which, he was well apprised, would meet with great Obstructions, when he had, ready at hand, a more certain and easy Method of finding Relief? Had he been satisfied, thatInnocenthad such a Privilege, is it likely he would have written to him on so urgent an Occasion, without taking the least Notice of it; that he would have contented himself with only intreating him to procure the assembling of a General Council? Should a Bishop now, apprehending himself injured by a National or Provincial Synod, appeal, not to the Pope, but, asChrysostomdid, to a General Council, he would, by such an Appeal, draw upon himself the Indignation of theRomanSee: for it would be thence concluded, and no Conclusion can be more natural, that he did not acknowlege the Power of receivingAppealsclaimed by that See.

Chrysostomneveracknowleged such aPower.

ButChrysostom, say they, did acknowledge such a Power; for, in his Letter toInnocent, he intreats himto declare such wicked Proceedings void and null, and to pronounce all, who had any Share in them, punishable, according to the Ecclesiastical Laws. ButChrysostomaddresses himself here, not toInnocentalone, as I have already observed, but to him, in Conjunction withVeneriusofMilan, andChromatiusofAquileia[1428]; nay, he addresses himself, throughout the whole Letter, to more Persons than one; and yetBaroniushas the Assurance to style the Letter anAppealtoInnocent[1429]. And why to him, and not to the other Two, since he writ nothing to him but what he writ to them?|The Disingenuity ofBellarmine.|Bellarmine, finding some Expressions in the above-mentioned Letter, which he thought might be so interpreted as to favour and countenance the Pretensions of the See ofRome, hadChrysostomaddressed himself toInnocentalone, makes him accordingly, by altering the Number in the Passage he quotes, address himself toInnocentalone[N49]; and then concludes, that even theGreeksacknowleged the Bishop ofRomefor their Supreme Judge[1430]. What must every impartial Man think of a Cause, that wants to be thus defended? What of those, who thus defend it?

N49. He changesobsecro ut scribatisintoobsecro ut scribas.

Innocent’s Letter toExuperiusBishop ofToulouse.

About this time, that is, in the Year 405.Innocent, being consulted byExuperius[N50]Bishop ofToulouse, concerning some Points of Discipline, answered him by a Decretal, containing the following Decisions: 1. That the Priests and Deacons, who were daily employed in sacrificing or baptizing, were not to be allowed the Useof Matrimony; that those, who were ignorant of the Decretal issued bySyricius, might be forgiven, upon their promising thenceforth to live continent; but, as to the rest, they should, as unworthy of Indulgence, be deposed. The Second Article relates to those, who, after Baptism, had led a wicked or sinful Life, and at the Point of Death desired the Communion.Innocentdeclares, that to such, according to the antient Discipline of the Church, which was more severe, Repentance was granted, and not the Communion; but, according to the present Practice, both were granted. By Repentance is here meant, according to the most probable Opinion, a Reconciliation with the Church; and, by the Communion, the Eucharist, which the Thirteenth Canon of the Council ofNicecommands to be given to all dying Persons who desire it. Some doubted whether it was lawful for a Christian to discharge the Office of a Judge, in criminal Cases.Innocenttherefore declares, in the Third Article, that no Penance ought to be imposed upon those who had condemned Criminals to the Rack, or even to Death, the Civil Power having been established by God for the Punishment of Criminals. As Women were, it seems, more frequently punished for Adultery than Men, some imagined that Crime not to be alike punishable in both. This NotionInnocentconfutes in the Fourth Article; adding, that Women were more frequently punished, merely because the Husbands were more forward in accusing their Wives, than Wives were in accusing their Husbands. The Fifth Article is a Confirmation of the Third; for it only absolves from all Sins such as are obliged, by their Office, to prosecute or condemn Criminals. The Sixth Article excludes from the Communion of the Church all Men, who, after they have been parted from their Wives, marry other Women; and all Women, who, after they have been parted from their Husbands, marry other Men[N51]. The same Punishment is, by thisArticle, inflicted on those who marry them, but not on their Parents or Relations, provided they have been no-way accessory to that unlawful Contract. The last Article contains a Catalogue of the Canonical Books of Scripture, the same as are still acknowleged by the Church ofRomeas Canonical. In the same Article, some Books are pointed out, that ought to be absolutely condemned and rejected[1431][N52]. These Directions, or Instructions,Innocentpretends to have drawn partly from Scripture, and partly from Tradition; and thanksExuperius, because he had, by applying to him for a Solution to his Difficulties, engaged him to examine them with Attention, and thereby given him an Opportunity of learning what he had not known before. It is surprising he should have mentioned the Scripture, since the very first Article, debarring for ever married Men from the Use of Matrimony, is an open Contradiction to the Directions given by St.Paulto all married Persons, without Restraint or Distinction;Defraud you not one the other, except it be withConsent for a time, &c.and come together again, that Satan tempt you not for your Incontinency[1432].

N50.Exuperiuswas, as we gather fromAusonius, a Native ofBourdeaux, one of the greatest Orators of his Time, and had governedSpainin Quality of Prefect. He afterwards withdrew from the World; embraced the Ecclesiastical State in the Place of his Nativity[1]; and was, for his eminent Virtues, raised to the See ofToulouse. He was chiefly commendable for his Charity to the Poor; though he bestowed the greater Part of it on Objects, perhaps, of all, the least worthy of his Compassion: for, by the MonkSisennius, he sent considerable Sums into the East, to be distributed there among the Monks ofEgyptandPalæstine[2]; which might have been better employed at home,Gaulbeing then threatened with an Invasion of theVandals,Alans, and other barbarous Nations; who, accordingly, broke into that Province on the last Day of the Year 406. and made themselves Masters ofToulouseitself. It was, however, this Kindness ofExuperiusto the Monks, that chiefly recommended him toJerom[3], who often mentions him with the greatest Commendations[4], and even inscribed to him his Comment onZechariah.1. Paulin. ep. 20.2. Hier. præf. in lib. 1, 2, & 3. Zech. & ep. 152.3. Idem ibid.N51. The matrimonial Bond is held, by the Church ofRome, indissoluble, and a Separation only allowed as to Bed and Board, even in Cases of Adultery; whence it follows, that so long as they both live, neither can marry, without being guilty of Adultery. There are, however, someannulling Impediments, as the Canonists style them, that is, Circumstances rendering the Marriage-contract null; and if any of these intervene, and is made to appear, the Parties are then declared not to have been married; and, consequently, free to marry whom they please. TillInnocent’s Time, Men, who had been parted from their Wives convicted of Adultery, were allowed to marry again. ThisEpiphaniustells us in express Terms; adding, that, agreeably to Scripture (no doubt toMatt.v. 32.), it could be no Crime to marry again; that those who married again were not excluded, on that score, from Life everlasting; and consequently ought not to be excluded from the Communion of the Church[1]. The Scope and Design ofEpiphanius, throughout his Work, was to acquaint us with the several Heresies that sprung up in the Church, and to explain, in Opposition to them, the Catholic Doctrines. It must therefore have been deemed a Heresy in his Time, that is, towards the latter End of the Fourth Century, to think the matrimonial Bond indissoluble, even in Cases of Adultery, or to hold it unlawful for a Man to marry again, who had put away his Wifefor the Cause of Fornication. But the Heresy became afterwards a Catholic Truth, and the Catholic Truth a Heresy. This Change, however, was not so much owing toInnocent’s Decretal, as to the Two Books, which St.Austinwrit about the Year 419. to prove, that it is unlawful for a Husband, who has put away his Wife, even for Adultery, or for a Wife who has been thus put away, to marry again, while both are living. He founds his Opinion on that of St.Paul,The Wife is bound by the Law, as long as her Husband liveth[2]. But, instead of understanding that Passage with the Exception made by our Saviour himself,Whosoever shall put away his Wife, saving for the Cause of Fornication, &c. he endeavours, by many logical Distinctions, and unnatural Interpretations, to remove that Exception, though expressed by the Evangelist in the plainest Terms. He was therein, no doubt, misled, by the groundless, but then reigning, Notion, of an extraordinary Merit annexed to Celibacy; and therefore ends his Word with exhorting the Husbands, who have put away their Wives, to observe Continency, in Imitation of the Ecclesiastics, who observe it (says he) with the greatest Exactness, though it was not by their own Choice that some of them went into Orders. It may be questioned, whether, even then, the Continence of the unmarried Clergy was such as he represents it.1. Epiph. hæref. 59.2. 1 Corinth. vii. 39.N52. These were several Books, styledThe Acts of the Apostles, forged byLeucius,Nezocharis, andLeonides, and ascribed by them to some of the Apostles.Leuciuswas, by Sect, aManichee, as appears fromAustin, who confuted his Books[1].NezocharisandLeonidesare, byInnocent, styled Philosophers. The Books ofLeucius, in the latter End of the present Century, were anew declared Apocryphal by PopeGelasius:The Books, says he in one of his Decretals,composed byLeucius,a Disciples of the Devil, are all Apocryphal[2].1. Aug. de fide contra Manich.2. Gelas. in Decretal. de lib. Apocryph.

1. Paulin. ep. 20.2. Hier. præf. in lib. 1, 2, & 3. Zech. & ep. 152.

1. Paulin. ep. 20.

2. Hier. præf. in lib. 1, 2, & 3. Zech. & ep. 152.

3. Idem ibid.

N51. The matrimonial Bond is held, by the Church ofRome, indissoluble, and a Separation only allowed as to Bed and Board, even in Cases of Adultery; whence it follows, that so long as they both live, neither can marry, without being guilty of Adultery. There are, however, someannulling Impediments, as the Canonists style them, that is, Circumstances rendering the Marriage-contract null; and if any of these intervene, and is made to appear, the Parties are then declared not to have been married; and, consequently, free to marry whom they please. TillInnocent’s Time, Men, who had been parted from their Wives convicted of Adultery, were allowed to marry again. ThisEpiphaniustells us in express Terms; adding, that, agreeably to Scripture (no doubt toMatt.v. 32.), it could be no Crime to marry again; that those who married again were not excluded, on that score, from Life everlasting; and consequently ought not to be excluded from the Communion of the Church[1]. The Scope and Design ofEpiphanius, throughout his Work, was to acquaint us with the several Heresies that sprung up in the Church, and to explain, in Opposition to them, the Catholic Doctrines. It must therefore have been deemed a Heresy in his Time, that is, towards the latter End of the Fourth Century, to think the matrimonial Bond indissoluble, even in Cases of Adultery, or to hold it unlawful for a Man to marry again, who had put away his Wifefor the Cause of Fornication. But the Heresy became afterwards a Catholic Truth, and the Catholic Truth a Heresy. This Change, however, was not so much owing toInnocent’s Decretal, as to the Two Books, which St.Austinwrit about the Year 419. to prove, that it is unlawful for a Husband, who has put away his Wife, even for Adultery, or for a Wife who has been thus put away, to marry again, while both are living. He founds his Opinion on that of St.Paul,The Wife is bound by the Law, as long as her Husband liveth[2]. But, instead of understanding that Passage with the Exception made by our Saviour himself,Whosoever shall put away his Wife, saving for the Cause of Fornication, &c. he endeavours, by many logical Distinctions, and unnatural Interpretations, to remove that Exception, though expressed by the Evangelist in the plainest Terms. He was therein, no doubt, misled, by the groundless, but then reigning, Notion, of an extraordinary Merit annexed to Celibacy; and therefore ends his Word with exhorting the Husbands, who have put away their Wives, to observe Continency, in Imitation of the Ecclesiastics, who observe it (says he) with the greatest Exactness, though it was not by their own Choice that some of them went into Orders. It may be questioned, whether, even then, the Continence of the unmarried Clergy was such as he represents it.

1. Epiph. hæref. 59.

2. 1 Corinth. vii. 39.

N52. These were several Books, styledThe Acts of the Apostles, forged byLeucius,Nezocharis, andLeonides, and ascribed by them to some of the Apostles.Leuciuswas, by Sect, aManichee, as appears fromAustin, who confuted his Books[1].NezocharisandLeonidesare, byInnocent, styled Philosophers. The Books ofLeucius, in the latter End of the present Century, were anew declared Apocryphal by PopeGelasius:The Books, says he in one of his Decretals,composed byLeucius,a Disciples of the Devil, are all Apocryphal[2].

1. Aug. de fide contra Manich.

2. Gelas. in Decretal. de lib. Apocryph.

His Letter toAnysiusofThessalonica.

As the Bishops ofRomehad, ever since the time ofDamasus, taken upon them to appoint the Bishop ofThessalonicatheir Vicar forEast-Illyricum,Innocentno sooner heard, thatRufushad been promoted to that See, vacant by the Death ofAnysius, than he let all the Bishops in those Parts know, by a Circular Letter, probably directed toRufushimself, that he conferred on him the same Dignity which his Predecessors had conferred on the other Bishops ofThessalonica. He writ, at the same time, a private Letter toRufus, containing some Instructions relating to the Exercise of his Vicarious Power, and, with them, the Names of the Provinces which he was to govern, as his Vicar and First Primate; but without intrenching, addsInnocent, upon the Rights and Privileges of the Primate or Metropolitan of each Province. In this Letter he takes great Care, thatRufusshould not forget he is indebted for such a Power to the See ofRome; for that he frequently repeats, as if he entertained some Jealousy ofRufus, or apprehended that he might claim such a Power, as Bishop ofThessalonica, that City being, according to the Civil Division of the Empire, on which the Ecclesiastical was ingrafted, the Metropolis ofEast-Illyricum[1433].

Romereduced togreat Streights byAlaric.

The same Year 407. the EmperorHonoriusvisited the City ofRome, and continued there till the Month ofMayof the Year 408. On the 23d of the followingAugust,Stilichowas killed; andAlarictheGoth, enteringItalysoon after his Death, appeared beforeRome, and laid close Siege to that City in the latter End of the same Year. As no Provisions could be conveyed into the Place, all the Avenues being shut up, and well guarded, a Famine soon ensued, and upon the Famine a Plague, which daily swept off great Numbers of the Inhabitants. In this Extremity, such of the Senators as still adhered to the Pagan Superstitions, promising themselves Relief from the Gods of their Ancestors, resolved to implore their Protection, by solemn Sacrifices offered up to them in the Capitol, and other public Places of the City.|ThePaganSuper-stitions connived at byInnocent.|This Resolution, saysZosimus[1434], they imparted toInnocent, then Bishop ofRome, who, sacrificing his private Opinion to the public Welfare, agreed to it, on Condition that the Ceremony should be privately performed. Of these SacrificesSozomentootakes particular Notice[1435]; but makes no Mention ofInnocent; which has induced some to suspect the Veracity ofZosimus, who was, as is well known, a sworn Enemy to the Christian Religion. But that those Sacrifices were performed, is affirmed both by him andSozomen; and it is not at all probable, thatPompeianus, who was then Governor ofRome, and a Christian, would have suffered them, without the Consent and Approbation ofInnocent. However that be, I see not whyBaroniusshould be so provoked againstZosimus, for makingInnocentthus connive at the superstitious Worship of the Gentiles, since his Successors have always allowed, and do still allow, even inRomeitself, the free Exercise of theJewishWorship.

InnocentleavesRome,and repairs tothe Emperor atRav-enna.

Romebeing reduced to the last Extremity, Deputies were, in the End, sent out to treat withAlaric, who, hearkening to their Proposals, raised the Siege, upon their paying to him Five thousand Pounds Weight of Gold, Thirty thousand of Silver, Four thousand Silk Garments, Three thousand Skins of Purple Dye, and as many Pounds of Pepper. At the same time theRomansengaged to mediate a Peace between him andHonorius: but the Emperor refusing to comply with the Terms that were proposed, though no-ways unreasonable, theRomanSenate sent Two solemn Deputations toRavenna, whereHonoriusthen resided, to lay before him the Danger to which he exposed the Empire, and persuade him to accept the Conditions offered him both by them and byAlaric. As the First Deputation proved unsuccessful,Innocent, thinking his Presence might give some Weight to the Negotiations, leftRome, and, together with the Deputies, repaired toRavenna. Thus he escaped the Mortification of seeing the City ofRometaken and plundered by the Barbarians[1436]. For,Honoriusstill rejecting the Terms of Peace,Alaricreturned with his Army beforeRome; and, having made himself Master of it on the 24th ofAugustof the Year 410. treated the great Metropolis of the Empire no better, ifJerommay be credited, than theGreeksare said to have treated antientTroy[1437].

Back to Index Next